|
|
|
Jewish World Review May 17, 2005 / 8 Iyar, 5765 Kerry, the sequel? Senator still in the spotlight, but Democrats aren't cheering By Carl P. Leubsdorf
http://www.JewishWorldReview.com |
Each week, President Bush sets out on his 2005 version of the campaign
trail, touting his Social Security proposals.
But Bush is not the only 2004 candidate campaigning these days. Rival
John Kerry is also on the road, urging action to provide health
insurance for 11 million uninsured children.
"As far as I'm concerned, things didn't stop on November 2,'' the
senator noted on a recent visit to Austin, Texas.
But even some who worked for Kerry are leery of what looks like his
ultimate goal: another race for the White House in 2008.
Since losing last year's election, Kerry has been extraordinarily
active, raising and spending campaign funds, issuing policy
pronouncements on his Web site and in newspaper ads, thanking backers
and making clear he expects to be a force in the Democratic Party.
While he declined to challenge the election results in Ohio, he has said
many voters there were intimidated to keep them from voting.
Some who heard him say he sounds like a bad loser, given the fact that
he lost the popular vote by more than 3 million votes.
Even some positive things Kerry has done have produced negative
reaction. Winding up last year's campaign with more than $15 million in
unspent funds, he made large contributions to Democratic Party
committees and for specific matters such as the recount that helped
Democrats win the Washington governorship.
But that only makes some Democrats complain he should have spent the
money last year.
He has even staged two fund-raisers for the 2006 Senate campaign of a
potential party rival, Hillary Rodham Clinton.
That's especially interesting in view of a recent incident on the Senate
floor in which he reportedly blasted Minnesota Sen. Mark Dayton for
introducing the New York senator at a Minneapolis dinner as "the next
great president of the United States of America."
"What are you doing endorsing my 2008 presidential opponent?" Kerry told
Dayton, according to the Minneapolis Star-Tribune. Dayton told the paper
Kerry was serious, but a Kerry aide called it "nothing but joshing"
between old friends.
Jenny Backus, a spokesman for the senator, denied that Kerry's
activities are aimed at 2008.
"He's focused like a laser beam on 2005 and 2006," she said, adding that
his main goals are "fighting the causes that were raised in the
campaign, helping Democratic candidates up and down the ticket and using
his funds to strengthen and build the party."
Kerry's post-election activity contrasts sharply with former Vice
President Al Gore's political disappearing act after 2000.
Gore not only left the stage but also failed to thank many who helped
him, leaving few Democrats clamoring for his return.
Despite this activity, there's little sign the party has as much
enthusiasm for a continuing Kerry role as he does.
In a recent National Journal survey of Democratic insiders, only two of
90 picked Kerry as the likely 2008 nominee, while 68 picked Clinton. An
earlier National Journal survey indicated that virtually none regarded
him as the party's current leader.
"That's not something we're thinking about or worried about right now,"
Backus said.
Though few blame Kerry as much for his defeat as they did Gore, many
call him a flawed candidate, lacking personal appeal.
Campaign interviews last year indicated many Kerry votes came from
traditional Democrats with little enthusiasm for him.
Adding that to his political handicaps — the Northeast liberal image,
his indecision on the Iraq war and slow reaction to campaign attacks on
his Vietnam war service — it's hard to see how four more years will make
him more appealing the second time around.
Indeed, if Kerry tries again, he might not only have to beat Clinton but
also erstwhile running mate John Edwards, several newer candidates — and
history.
Since World War II, only two defeated nominees have won their party's
nomination four years later. Republican Thomas Dewey lost to President
Harry Truman in 1948 as he had to President Franklin D. Roosevelt in
1944, and Democrat Adlai Stevenson lost twice in the 1950s to President
Dwight D. Eisenhower.
Every weekday JewishWorldReview.com publishes what many in in the media and Washington consider "must-reading". Sign up for the daily JWR update. It's free. Just click here.
© 2005, Dallas Morning News Knight Ridder/Tribune Information Services.
|
Arnold Ahlert | |||||||||||
